Family sues Riverside County, sheriff over drug overdose death of inmate

Man accused of rapes, molestation of child withdraws request for reduced bail PG

No fluctuation in Riverside County’s jobless rate in February

The family of an inmate who died while in custody at the Byrd Detention Center in Murrieta is federally suing Riverside County and Sheriff Chad Bianco over what the plaintiffs allege were civil rights violations because the defendant did not receive appropriate treatment.

The family of 29-year-old Richard Matus Jr. is seeking unspecified damage awards and other concessions from the county and the sheriff’s department stemming from his death on Aug. 11.

The plaintiffs and their attorneys plan to speak at a news conference in front of U.S. District Court in downtown Riverside Friday morning.

“This action seeks to bring to public light the deliberate disregard for safety and protection carried out by the individual defendants in this action,” according to the

50-page civil suit.

It lists a range of causes, largely based on alleged violations of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which requires equal treatment under the law. However, there are also allegations of breaches of the California Civil Code, deprivations tied to alleged medical negligence and policy malfeasance.

Neither the county or sheriff’s officials immediately responded to a request for comment.

According to court records, Matus was awaiting adjudication of charges of attempted murder and armed robbery for a 2018 holdup at a Banning medical marijuana dispensary that left three people seriously injured. His brother and co-defendant, 23-year-old Raymond Matus, is slated to be tried in April on the same charges.

The lawsuit states Richard

Matus died from a drug overdose after suffering a “medical emergency for an appreciable amount of time” last August.

The plaintiffs allege jail staff were deficient in their response and pointed to wider, systemic problems caused by the sheriff, his administrators and the county as a whole for setting the stage for their loved one’s loss.

Matus’ death was one of 18 in-custody fatalities in 2022, and that number represents what the plaintiffs called an “alarming” spike traced to the sheriff’s department’s “unconstitutional patterns and practices.”

In the previous 15 years, prior to 2022, the highest number of documented in-custody deaths was 12, the plaintiffs said.

“Long before Richard Matus Jr.’s death, the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department knew that there existed a great indifference to the safety and protection of the inmates who were in the government’s custody within the county’s correctional facilities,” according to the suit.

The plaintiffs refer repeatedly to the federal lawsuit filed by the Bay Area-based Prison Law Group on behalf of convicted felon Quinton E. Gray in 2013.

That civil action sought to remedy what the plaintiffs claimed were ongoing failures in ensuring inmates with mental health disorders received appropriate treatment. The suit culminated in a settlement between the county and plaintiffs in 2016 in which the county entered into a federal consent decree, promising to significantly expand medical resources available to detainees. The health reforms came with a $40 million price tag.

According to the Matus suit, despite the consent decree, sheriff’s administrators have “deliberately failed to take even modest actions to prevent in-custody deaths at Riverside County correctional facilities.”

In addition to Matus, at least five other in-custody fatalities in 2022 were recorded as “drug overdoses,” according to the suit. Others included homicide, suicide and “natural causes.” However, three deaths that occurred between Oct. 13 and Dec. 12 remain under investigation and undetermined.

The losses prompted the California Department of Justice last month to announce a civil rights investigation targeting Bianco and his staff. Attorney General Rob Bonta said at the time “it is clear ... families and communities in Riverside County are hurting and looking for answers.”

“Whether you have a loved one in jail, or are worried about crime in your neighborhood, we all benefit when there is action to ensure the integrity of policing in our state,” he said.

Bianco fired back, saying publicly, “This investigation is based on nothing but false and misleading statements and straight-out lies from activists, including their attorneys. This will prove to be a complete waste of time and resources.”

He also questioned the legitimacy of the Matus family’s complaints to the DOJ, writing in an online forum, “Did they ever demand that their family members not commit crimes in the first place? Did their parents ever demand they take responsibility for their own actions?”

Along with an unstated monetary award, the plaintiffs are seeking changes in “policies, procedures and practices” that “mitigate the obvious well-known risks of harm attendant” in Richard Matus’ death.

No hearings have been set yet in the matter.

Despite growth in some sectors of the regional economy, Riverside County’s unemployment rate was unchanged last month, according to figures released Friday by the California Employment Development Department.

The countywide jobless rate in February, based on preliminary EDD estimates, was 4.5%, the same as in January.

EDD posted the data outside of its usual schedule due to an annual statistical revision process, done in concert with the U.S. Department of Labor, known as “benchmarking,” which is intended to improve accuracy of results. The January unemployment figures were published earlier this week. The benchmarking process has now ended, and EDD officials will return to regularly posting data on the third Friday of every month for the rest of the year.

According to figures, the February 2023 rate was only two-tenths of a percentage point lower than the year-ago level, when countywide unemployment stood at 4.7%.

An estimated 52,500 county residents were recorded as out of work in February, and 1,105,500 were employed, according to EDD.

See J obless rate Page 28

By City News Service By City News Service By City News Service

Bench warrant issued for man suspected in paddle beating

One of two brothers accused of beating a man with a wooden paddle over two days in Cathedral City as a form of “street justice” failed to appear in court Wednesday and had a warrant issued for his arrest.

Eduardo Luis Espinoza, 34 was due in court Wednesday for a mandatory settlement conference with his brother Carlos Jose Espinoza, 32, and Genaro Jaime Lozoya, 31, who is accused of keeping the victim from escaping, according to court records.

Due to the absence of Eduardo Espinoza in court, Riverside County Superior Court Judge Gregory Olson issued a bench warrant for his arrest and will have his bail set at $200,000.

The brothers are charged with one felony count of false imprisonment and two felony counts of assault on a person causing great bodily injury, along with sentenceenhancing allegations of using a weapon — a wooden paddle — during the commission of a felony, according to court records.

Eduardo Espinoza is additionally charged with one felony count each of robbery, criminal threats and being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm.

Lozoya is charged with one felony count each of false

See P addle beating Page 27